La Dee-vina Comedia

That's one way of looking at it. The other way is that Laura Kane sent the matter to the tribunal as a test case to know whether the laws of the game satisfactorily addressed Maynard's action. Kane now knows they don't so can work to find a way to change the rules to make it clear that what Maynard did should be an offence which results in suspension.

It's no more odd than our best accumulator (Dunstan) not getting games in the seniors. There's more to football than a single strength. With respect to Bedford, I don't think it was Spargo keeping him out; I suspect (but obviously don't know) that the club thought Chandler had moved ahead of him in the pecking order and consequently thought Bedford was unlikely to get the game time he wanted.

Actually, the idea of giving one individual the power was intended to overcome the previous iteration called the Match Review Panel, or MRP, which had more than one person involved which resulted in massive inconsistency. The MRO, in theory, should eliminate much of that inconsistency, but I believe it's too much to expect one person to make these decisions every week for a full season. I suspect there is no "perfect" model, but I do like the suggestions made earlier in this thread that the role being undertaken by the MRO would be better filled by former field umpires. I'm not arguing for against the decisions Michael Christian has made during his time as the MRO, but I admire his willingness to accept the slings and arrows of misfortune that have come his way, week after week for doing a thankless task. For that, he deserves commendation.

Genuinely surprised that Gawn didn't get 10 votes. Every person I've spoken to who saw the game, whether on TV or live, or are supporters of Melbourne, Collingwood or neutral, have said that Gawn was clearly BOG and by a big margin.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if Noble is a late inclusion for one of the ruckmen should the predicted wet weather arrive before gametime.

All this discussion about the weather...pfft..it's just seasonal. It's Colliwobble season.

There is some good analysis about this game. The following isn't. Don't blame me if you want your five minutes back after reading it. You have been warned. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/we-asked-an-ai-bot-to-predict-every-game-of-this-year-s-afl-final-series-20230905-p5e24u.html?fbclid=IwAR2z_f9OgcLEg8H_9v_5i8SxdPQUtQHqWhWk8W7ZYqQwbs95zPwUpSlRzBI

Or maybe it's because in the seven grand finals where Melbourne has played Collingwood, we've won six of them. And even if this isn't the reason, it's always nice to read this statement of fact in any context.

Not sure about this picture. The background looks like a gross magnification of someone's intestines. On the other hand, and more importantly, congratulations to Joel.

They've got detectors for fake metal now? Who would have thought.

English actor Charlie Cox reminds me of the new AFL CEO.

I'm looking forward to it.

With a bit of luck, KISS will be the only ones at the MCG on Grand Final Day wearing black and white face paint.

As long as we train as we play, we should be OK.

Add Oskar Baker to your list.

I expect it's been explained somewhere, but what exactly is a knee fracture? I've never previously heard of this. My rudiementary understanding is that four bones contribute to the knee: femur, fibula, tibia and patella. Is a "knee fracture" a break in one of these bones? if so why isn't it called a "broken fibula" (for example)?

Photo only shows left foot. Are we sure the right one is OK?

...and it's built in to his NDA.

This post may be written in jest, but I really don't like it. Cox wears his glasses to stop him from going blind from another eye injury. It's OK not to like him, but let's not wish him a serious, life-changing injury.

I'm pretty sure I've heard or seen something official from the AFL that the decision was made that the Thursday night slot was always going to be given to the team finishing top as a "reward" for finishing first so as to give them the longest break should they lose their first final and need to play the following week. What I don't know is whether that's a bit of post-facto rationalisation once the AFL knew that Collingwood was going to finish first. To be fair, it's a logical decision.

I like the way you've subtly merged Geelong with the Blues.

I really dislike the way the rookie list is used these days. In my opinion it should only ever be used for players under the age of 20 who didn't get selected in the main draft. (I exclude category B rookies, although I wouldn't call players in that category "rookies" anyway). If the AFL wants to have a list for delisted players who are getting second or third chances or players with long-term injuries, by all means allow it...just don't use up spots for genuine "rookies" in doing so. Call it a "supplementary list" or something else.

I think the opposite. I see Goodwin as a coach who will do all his experimenting and unexpected selections during the year so as to settle on the preferred approach well before finals. Injuries affect the availability of players, but I fully expect Goodwin to be conservative in finals and only go with what's been tried and tested already. I'd be shocked if we saw something we've never seen before.

or no news is no news.

I'm totally confused. I thought the discussion was about finals games against Collingwood in 1988 and 1989. Flower's last game was in 1987. So, when was this Danny Hughes/BT game?